datto_edr_tasks_get

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the returned payload ('status, progress and message'), which matters because there is no output schema, and by tying it to an initiating operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences: the operation and endpoint come first, the usage cue second. No filler, nothing redundant with the schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter read tool with annotations and no output schema, this is nearly complete: it says what is fetched, what comes back, and why you'd call it. A note on where the task id originates (e.g. from scans_list or run_response) would close the last gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% with the id field documented as 'Object id (GUID)', so the baseline is 3. The description only reinforces that the id identifies a user task, without adding format, source, or how to obtain the id.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one user task by id') and even cites the underlying endpoint GET /api/usertasks/{id}. The singular 'one' implicitly distinguishes it from datto_edr_tasks_list and datto_edr_task_items_list, though those siblings are never named.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'Use it to follow a scan or response started by this server' gives a concrete trigger condition for calling the tool. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when not to use it (e.g. use tasks_list to discover ids first), so it is clear context without exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.